On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 06:11:37PM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:
> The i2c-rcar driver currently prints an error message if the master_xfer> callback fails. However if the bus is being probed then lots of NAKs> will be generated, causing the output of a number of errors printed.> > To solve this, disable the print if the error is not -EREMOTEIO.
Basically OK. Yet, according to 'fault-codes" it should be -ENXIO. May
be a good time to fix this as well.
Also, you might want to print for -EIO only? Or do you want to see
-EAGAIN, too?

On 24/01/14 17:11, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 06:11:37PM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:>> The i2c-rcar driver currently prints an error message if the master_xfer>> callback fails. However if the bus is being probed then lots of NAKs>> will be generated, causing the output of a number of errors printed.>>>> To solve this, disable the print if the error is not -EREMOTEIO.>> Basically OK. Yet, according to 'fault-codes" it should be -ENXIO. May> be a good time to fix this as well.>> Also, you might want to print for -EIO only? Or do you want to see> -EAGAIN, too?
Ok, although the change to the error code should probably be a separate
patch instead of modifying this one.

On 24/01/14 17:11, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 06:11:37PM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:>> The i2c-rcar driver currently prints an error message if the master_xfer>> callback fails. However if the bus is being probed then lots of NAKs>> will be generated, causing the output of a number of errors printed.>>>> To solve this, disable the print if the error is not -EREMOTEIO.>> Basically OK. Yet, according to 'fault-codes" it should be -ENXIO. May> be a good time to fix this as well.>> Also, you might want to print for -EIO only? Or do you want to see> -EAGAIN, too.
I'm not sure, I've not seen any EAGAIN replies from the driver.
I will leave this for a future patch.